Re: "transparent" output and throughput, demystified

[Dave Kemper]

On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 11:04 AM Deri <deri@chuzzlewit.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> The example using \
> [u012F] is superior (in my opinion) because it is using a single glyph the
> font designer intended for that character rather than combining two glyphs
> that don't marry up too well.

I agree with this opinion.

> If you know of any fonts which include combining diacritics but don't
> provide single glyphs with the base character and the diacritic combined,
> please correct me.

My go-to example here is the satirical umlaut over the n in the
canonical rendering of the band name Spinal Tap.  Combining diacritics
can form glyphs that no natural language uses, so no font will supply
a precomposed form.

> This result may surprise users, that entering exactly the same
> keystrokes as they used when writing the document, finds the text in the
> document, but fails to find the bookmark.

I also agree this is less than ideal.